Comparing of two or more evaluation items or targets can be implemented by utilising some decision making application implemented in a data network. The decision making application is sometimes called also a comparator. After utilizing a decision making application a person can make a selection that is based on features of the items that have been assessed. A target of the comparison may be for example a product, a service, a travel destination, a person etc. The purpose of the comparison is to produce a final result, on the basis of which a target can be presented to a person performing the comparison from several alternative comparison targets, which target best corresponds to the needs and desires of the person performing the comparison with regards to the properties used in the comparison, which describe the comparison target.
Below are depicted some examples of decision making applications developed by ZEF Oy. The decision making applications below may be utilized when making personal decisions in different situations.
VotingAid®:
VotingAid® is a decision making application that may be also called a voting advice application. VotingAid® helps people make more educated decisions in elections. VotingAid® facilitates an individual voter in choosing a candidate that best matches the voter's needs.
In VotingAid® a creator of VotingAid® application prepares questions about important political issues to be utilized in VotingAid®. When the questions are ready the VotingAid® creator sends to candidates invites to give answers to the questions of VotingAid®. If the candidate wants to participate in the VotingAid® query he or she gives his or her answers to the questions of VotingAid®. When at least most of the candidates have answered the questions the VotingAid® creator publishes the prepared VotingAid® in Internet.
After the VotingAid® has been published the voters may answer these same questions as the candidates and his or her answers are compared to corresponding answers of the candidates. VotingAid® shows which one of the candidates has most similar opinions compared to the opinions of the voter. That way the voter can find out which one of the candidates is the best choice for him or her in the election.
eSalesman™:
eSalesman™ has features that are very similar to the VotingAid®. In eSalesman™ products or other items of at least one product or service supplier are compared between each other instead of candidates of VotingAid®.
Also in eSalesman™ an application creator creates questions about important issues to be used when a comparison between selected items is performed in eSalesman™. The application creator selects also items to be included to the present eSalesman™. When all questions and items to be assessed in the eSalesman™ are selected the application creator defines also for each question default attributes and item specific attribute values that are associated with the items.
When the default attributes for each question of all items are ready the application creator publishes the decision making application in Internet. Sometimes the creator of eSalesman™ may be called also as a reference user because he or she in a way classifies the items of eSalesman™.
When a user of eSalesman™ answers to questions his or hers answers are compared to the default attributes of items that the user has selected in eSalesman™. eSalesman™ is capable of showing which one of the selected items has most similar attribute values compared to user's answers. That item seems to match best user's requirements and expectations.
Both in VotingAid® and eSalesman™ the answers to the questions may be given by a one-dimensional evaluation line. An example of a possible evaluation line is shown in FIG. 1a. In the exemplary one-dimensional evaluation line 1 a question concerning customer satisfaction of a particular company is asked. An exemplary opinion/evaluation 2 of the user is presented on the evaluation line in FIG. 1a. In the example of FIG. 1a the left end of the evaluation line illustrates a situation where the user of the decision making application has negative a feeling about the exemplary company. The right end of the evaluation line in FIG. 1a illustrates a situation where the user of the decision making application has positive feelings about the company and almost completely agrees with the presented statement. The evaluation given by the user of the decision making application regarding the presented statement can be compared to attribute values of several different items or targets that are included in the present decision making application. By proceeding thus it is possible to calculate congruence between the evaluation given by the decision making application user and each comparison item. The congruency may be converted as an accuracy percentage.
Survey:
Survey is similar to VotingAid® or Salesman™ but without default attribute values of the items. There are only questions for the users who can answer the questions by utilizing a stepless graphical two-dimensional inquiry frame that is called a fourfold. An example of a graphical two-dimensional evaluation frame is shown in FIG. 1b. 
As an example of comparators may be mentioned a two-dimensional on-line comparator that is presented in U.S. Pat. No. 7,693,743. The patent presents a data collection and presentation method that functions in a data network, where a stepless two-dimensional data collection, evaluation and presentation manner is utilized for collecting customer needs and presenting a comparison result that is calculated from the customer needs. The evaluation results are normalized, so that the average of all evaluation points of the evaluator entered into the fourfold is set in the origin and the deviation is set to a standard value. With the described method the given responses can be scaled so that the customer's order of importance of different properties of the evaluation target are detected from the inquiry results, even if the responses given by the customer of the properties being evaluated were to be concentrated close together.
Above mentioned decision making applications may give a person or company valuable information when used. However, information from each above mentioned decision making application is managed independently nowadays. Therefore, there is a need for a solution where already existing comparison data about utilized items and their attributes of earlier decision making applications could be utilized for speeding up creation of a new decision making application.